>> Does anyone know of a site that has good closeup pictures and
>> explanations on how the arm grapples the power-data-grapple-fixture
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Go to NASAspaceflight.com
Or Google. Wikipedia is a bust.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Data_Grapple_Fixture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dextre
This PDF has some info about the PDGF (section 6.2.3):
http://www.nasawatch.com/usa/USA004882.pdf
The above says:
Envelopes for Robotic Access and other information on
the PDGF can be found in SSP 50228 Volume 15 Space Station
Program Configuration and Assembly Standard Interface Control
Document - Grapple Fixture Location ICD, NSTS 07700,
Volume XIV, Appendix 8, Space Shuttle System Payload
Accommodations Handbook - Payload Deployment and Retrieval
System, and NSTS 21000-IDD-ISS, International Space Station
Interface Definition Document. See Figure 6-1 below for an
illustration of the PDGF.
Also in section 6.2.1, there is this:
The AAS vehicle shall also be equipped with a SSRMS
compatible Grapple Fixture to permit robotics operation.
The AAS vehicle shall comply with the requirements in
NSTS 21000-IDD-ISS, Section 14 and NSTS 07700, System
Description and Data Design, Vol. XIX, Appendix 8, if a
FRGF or a Electrical Flight Grapple Fixture (EFGF) is
used. If the AAS employs a PDGF, then the design shall
comply with the requirements in SSP 42004, Mobile Servicing
System to User (Generic) Interface Control Document,
and SSP 42003, Space Station Manned Base (SSMB) to Mobile
Servicing System (MSS) ICD.
So there is a PDGF, EFGF, and FRGF. Makes you wonder if there are anymore
types of grapple fixtures, doesn't it? ;-)
Oh well, maybe this is a start? I'd be curious to see more about the design
myself, like what the "pinout" is.
Jeff

Signature
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
Mike Ross - 19 Mar 2008 20:50 GMT
> This PDF has some info about the PDGF (section 6.2.3):
>
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>
> Jeff
There is also the PVGF, which has electrical connectors like the PDGF, but
is built and mounted more like the reguler FRGF which makes it cheaper but
it can't be used as an SSRMS base. The EFGF is an old design that only
mates (electrically and structurally) with the shuttle arm.
The cost of a PDGF is quite high, so you only use those when you have to.
Mike Ross
>Go to NASAspaceflight.com
What an assinine answer. That site That site is at best disorganized with no
functional search engine. You could at least have suggested what document to
look for.
charliexmurphy@yahoo.com - 19 Mar 2008 17:12 GMT
> <charliexmur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Go to NASAspaceflight.com
>
> What an assinine answer. That site That site is at best disorganized with no
> functional search engine. You could at least have suggested what document to
> look for.
Yours is even more of an asinine answer
1. There is a shuttle Q&A or ISS Q&A thread to ask the question
2. The site is very organized with ISS, STS, constellation, and
unmanned vehicle sections. Don't know what more would be needed.
3. The search function works very well. It is just idiot proof which
I guess you must have failed the first gate
Brian Thorn - 20 Mar 2008 02:56 GMT
>1. There is a shuttle Q&A or ISS Q&A thread to ask the question
>2. The site is very organized with ISS, STS, constellation, and
>unmanned vehicle sections. Don't know what more would be needed.
>3. The search function works very well. It is just idiot proof which
>I guess you must have failed the first gate
I like NSF, but I have to agree with Glen... their Search Engine is
the pits. Not as bad as, say, the useless search engine on NASA Image
Exchange, but pretty weak nonetheless.
Plus, unmentioned in the previous reply, the really good stuff on NSF
is on L2. Prepare to empty your wallet.
Brian
Jorge R. Frank - 22 Mar 2008 06:34 GMT
>> <charliexmur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Go to NASAspaceflight.com
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> 3. The search function works very well. It is just idiot proof which
> I guess you must have failed the first gate
Oh, give me a break, Jim. The NSF search engine sucks. It is slow,
frequently bombs out with obscure Microsoft OLE DB error messages, and
is a lot pickier than Google on search terms. It is halfway functional
for an NSF veteran trying to find old posts, if he happens to remember
exact keywords from the posts. It is useless to n00bs. I get better
results using Google with "site:forum.nasaspaceflight.com".